USPTO serial 76438049
CLINICALLY DRIVEN RESOURCE PLANNING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TURNER, JASON FITZGERALD
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with CLINICALLY DRIVEN RESOURCE PLANNING?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Joan Optican Herman
JOAN OPTICAN HERMAN SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP2555 GRAND BLVDKANSAS CITY, MO 64108UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR USE IN THE HEALTHCARE FIELD, NAMELY SOFTWARE FOR MANAGING, STORING, ANALYZING, MAINTAINING, PROCESSING, STRUCTURING, REVIEWING, BUILDING, EDITING, DISTRIBUTING, COMMUNICATING, ORGANIZING, SHARING, REFERENCING, MONITORING AND INTEGRATING HEALTHCARE RELATED INFORMATION; COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR AUTOMATING HEALTHCARE PROCESSES, NAMELY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 22, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Sep 20, 2005 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2005 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 14, 2005 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 15, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 27, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 18, 2004 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 11, 2003 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Sep 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 2, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 2, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 2003 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Dec 30, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |